PC Isaacs rehonored!

/* August 5th, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


A small bit of historical event in Terengganu. I’m not sure why his named was removed in the first place, but its good to have some sort of remembrance of such folks.

The name of Terengganu’s prominent educator and philanthropist, the late Datuk P.C. Isaacs, which was scrapped as a street name during PAS’ rule in 1999, is back on the state map.

A road in the city, formerly known as Jalan Kampung Dalam, has been renamed as Jalan Dato Isaacs in appreciation of his contribution to the state.

Kuala Terengganu City Council reinstated Isaacs’ name on a road this month despite protests from local traders who claimed the renaming of the road would cause them to incur extra expenses as they had to change their signboards and letterheads.

“They are also worried that their new stocks may go astray as most drivers of outstation logistics lorries are dependent on the Global Positioning System or Googlemap to guide them,” he said.

Toh said he would discuss with the mayor about the need to explain to the traders why the road’s name was changed.

Jalan Dato Isaacs disappeared from the map after PAS renamed it Jalan Sultan Sulaiman.

Isaacs was the first Indian to be appointed to the Terengganu Legislative Assembly from 1948 to 1956 while his views on racial unity were incorporated in the Reid Com-mission.

After Barisan Nasional wrested the state in 2004, Isaacs’ children relentlessly lobbied with the state government to reinstate their father’s name as a street name.

Kuala Terengganu Indian Club chairman A. Manglesh said representatives from the business community affected by the renaming of the road had met him to discuss their problem.

Some of them, he said, were not even aware of who Isaacs was and his contribution to the community.

“It is not their fault as some of these businessmen are below 50 and have not heard of the late Isaacs,” he said.

Manglesh said Isaacs, who opened the English Grammar School which provided free education to the poor in 1950s, played a pivotal role in promoting Kuala Terengganu to the outside world.

Isaacs was later selected by the Reid Commission to help draft the Constitution of the Federation of Malaya.

Being blind not a deterrent to obtain Master degree!

/* August 5th, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Yet another role model for us!

KUALA LUMPUR: Being blind is no handicap to tertiary education. N. Laxme Preyala tha is a testament to this.

She was among 920 Universiti Malaya (UM) graduates who received their master’s degrees in the second session of the university’s 49th convocation here yesterday.

Laxme, 34, who has been blind since birth, received her Master’s in Education from UM Pro-Chancellor Raja Dr Nazrin Shah, who is also the Raja Muda of Perak.

“Although blind, one should always have a passion for knowledge because the door to employment will be opened wider for disabled people with knowledge,” said the second of three siblings who plans to pursue a doctorate in the same field.

Laxme, who teaches Bahasa Malaysia and moral studies at SK Brickfields 1, also dedicated her success to her mother, who died of dengue three years ago.

Another graduate with impaired sight, Al’Azifah Mohd Shafie, 30, said her will to compete with normal people in education and employment motivated her to get a Master’s in Syariah.

“From my experience, it is really difficult for a disabled person to land a job.

“So, to compete with normal people, I need extra knowledge for my advantage,” said the religious teacher at Sekolah Agama Menen gah Muhammadiah, Pekan Sabak, Sabak Bernam, who suffers from retinal pigmentation.

Another blind student, Ahmad Shamsuri Muhamad, 28, dedicated his success for his master’s degree in counselling to his family and friends, as well as UM lecturers.

He is pursuing a doctorate in UM and is active in associations and non-governmental organisations for the blind.

The convocation also saw twin sisters K. Shantini Devi and Shamini Devi receive their master’s degrees in counselling.

Shantini, 32, said she made the decision to pursue her studies in counselling after observing Shamini’s different approach to thinking and solving problems. — Bernama

From: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/8/4/nation/6793352&sec=nation

World 3rd Ati Rudra Maha Yagna in Batu Caves

/* August 5th, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


A six-day prayer event called Ati Rudra Maha Yagna that originated from India will be held for the first time in Kuala Lumpur next month.

The world’s third Ati Rudra Maha Yagna, considered by followers of religious guru Sathya Sai Baba as the highest form of worship to Lord Shiva, will be held in Batu Caves from Aug 7 to Aug 12.

Sri Subramaniam Swamy temple chairman Datuk R. Nadarajah said this would be the first time that the event had been held outside India.

“We are expecting about 5,000 participants in the six days,” he told a press conference in Kuala Lumpur recently.

Organising chairman Jullius Tan, who is also Persatuan Sathya Sai Nivas chairman, added the ceremony was to promote universal peace through the finding of oneself in meditation, mantras and prayers.

Also present at the press conference was former Malaysia Hindu Sangam president Datuk A. Vaithilingam.

The occasion will see 140 priests conducting the chants. There will also be cultural songs and other performances in the evening.

source: http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2010/8/4/central/6657917&sec=central

Who can solve Bukit Jalil estate workers problems?

/* August 3rd, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Its a pity that we have to read this problem every few months. You can search just in this blog and find that Bukit Jalil estate workers issue already started in 2007 itself. 3 years of ding-dong. MPs came and went. DPM came and went. One MP even shed tears. MIC came and went. HRP came and went. DBKL came and talk and talk and talk. Opposition also came and went.

And surely you remember the school to be located into cemetery vicinity? Yeap, the same area. Malaysia Boleh!

Somewhere in April this year, FT Ministry gave out compensation to some of the workers:

ONLY two former Ladang Bukit Jalil Estate workers have come forward to claim compensation from the Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing Ministry.

The two workers — P. Malliga, 47, and her mother, D. Thanabakkiam, 64, are among the 93 workers from the estate near Jalan Puchong. The estate was taken over by the government in 1980s and operations ceased in 1992, forcing the workers to lose their jobs.

The remaining 91 workers could not attend the cheque-presentation ceremony at the Kuala Lumpur City Hall headquarters on April 22 due to unforeseen circumstances.

Deputy Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing Minister Datuk M. Saravanan said RM734,160 had been put aside for these workers but only 29 would receive the money during the first phase.

“These 29 workers have proper documentation to successfully claim the compensation but I urge the remaining workers to come forth and claim their money,” he added.

The workers are advised to visit the DBKL headquarters in Jalan Raja Laut next Thursday to speed up the process.

“The rest of the workers will be given the compensation as soon as the documents and statutory declarations are complete,” Saravanan added.

Workers with the estate for seven and a half years are entitled to RM6,370 while those with 15 years of service and more will be given RM11,620.

Development work on the land have not begun as some 40 families are still residing on the grounds of the former estate.

Thanabakkiam and her daughter are among the few who shifted into PPR Muhibbah five years ago. Thanabakkiam said the estate was also home to dangerous wild animals.

“Once I felt something on my feet and, thinking it was my pet cat, I shook it off only to see a cobra slithering away. We use to have wild boars and monkeys wreaking havoc in our homes as well,” said Thanabakkiam, who served at the estate for 40 years.

Malliga added that flash floods were very common and their homes were in a terrible state. She also said the move was a blessing in disguise for them.

And as recent as June, DBKL said no eviction until discussion by FT Ministry and HR Ministry (MIC folks). Then, on July 20, the residents received eviction notice. Means what? Discussion over?

THE 41 families from Bukit Jalil Estate feel cheated by the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) over a promise made to them that they would not be evicted until their housing matter is resolved through a discussion.

On June 8, the residents received a letter from DBKL stating the city council would postpone demolition of the houses at the estate.

It also stated DBKL had received orders from the Federal Territories and Urban WellBeing Deputy Minister Datuk M. Saravanan that the next course of action would only be taken after a discussion between Federal Territories and Urban WellBeing and the Human Resource ministers.

However, the residents received a final eviction order on July 20 asking them to evacuate their houses by tomorrow.

Resident S. Thiagarajah said the families felt that the letters were contradictory and it seemed like DBKL was not keeping their word.

“Now we are to move out by tomorrow and failure to do so will not stop DBKL from demolishing our homes. What about the promise made to us in the June 8 letter?” he said at a press conference yesterday following DBKL’s announcement on July 30 that the land would be converted into a cemetery.

Kajang councillor S. Arutchelvan said a local authority had the right to enter a piece of land and evict squatters after giving them notice under the Clearance of Squatters Regulations 1969.

However, former estate workers are not squatters, he said.

“Squatters are illegal as they build houses on private or government land, but former estate workers were given houses built by a company with the full knowledge of the Government,” he said.

Arutchelvan said although the workers were asked to move into the public housing scheme at PPR Muhibbah in Puchong and given the option to buy, it was not a permanent solution to the problem.

He said they should be given permanent homes.

He cited Ladang Braemar in Kajang, Ladang Bukit Tinggi and Ladang Sungai Rasa in Klang and Brooklands Estate in Banting as examples where workers were given permanent homes and compensation.

Federal Territories and Selangor Community Association (Permas) president and Subang Jaya councillor Tan Jo Hann urged both the Federal Territories and Urban WellBeing and the Human Resource ministers to sit down with DBKL and the former estate workers to discuss the matter.

Right now both ministries and DBKL are passing the buck to one another and the workers are the victims. This mixed development is not well thought out and the authorities should not use eviction notices on these people,” he said.

The issue of the estate workers also garnered interests from neighbouring housing areas, as residents feel converting the estate land into a cemetery was not a suitable option.

Alam Putra Residents Asso-ciation chairman R.S. Maniam said a cemetery in the area was not wise planning, and according to local agenda 21, the local authorities should get neighbouring residents’ input before a plan was carried out.

“We have the right to have a say but we were not consulted,” he said.

No wonder people from Kampung Baru to rumah panjang Subang to Kampung Jinjang Selatan Tambahan don’t trust these people in DBKL. Got black and white also no point, everything can be changed. (Not to mention, own minister word also worthless 🙂 ).

It gets worse here. The resident said Mayor PROMISED to postpone eviction:

THE Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) is standing by its decision to evict the former estate workers from Ladang Bukit Jalil today despite the residents’ appeal to postpone the deadline.

The workers were told the eviction order dated July 20 was valid and they have to move out by today, as demolition works could be carried out any time after the deadline expires.

In a brief meeting between the residents and DBKL deputy director (services) Datuk Amin Nordin Abdul Aziz yesterday, Bandar Tun Razak MP Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim’s special representative Azman Abidin said he was informed the eviction order was valid, although a letter dated June 8 stated the local authority would postpone demolition of the houses at the estate.

The letter also stated DBKL had received orders from the Federal Territories and Urban WellBeing Deputy Minister Datuk M. Saravanan that the next course of action would only be taken after a discussion between the ministers for the Federal Territories and Urban WellBeing Ministry and the Human Resource Ministry.

The ministers have not delivered what they have promised and until then, it is unfair to evict the residents because they are not squatters, they are former estate workers,” said Azman.

He said the ministers should address the issues in the area, which also involved a Tamil school and temple.

“These issues should be resolved first before the workers are evicted. I was told by Amin to ask Khalid to convince the residents to move out to the nearby PPR Muhibbah, but the residents do not want that,” he said.

Resident S. Thiakarajah said City Hall was labelling the former estate workers as squatters and wanted them to take up the PPR housing scheme.

Once we take it, we will be given RM1,000 and automatically we will lose our rights as former estate workers,” he said.

He added that the residents were disappointed with DBKL and the ministries, as there were no follow-ups or meetings after the June 8 letter.

“All of a sudden we receive an eviction order on July 20, although two days later, Kuala Lumpur mayor Datuk Seri Ahmad Fuad Ismail promised Khalid to postpone the eviction order during a meeting with the MPs,” he said.

If protest, kena from police or labelled troublemakers or pro-opposition. If keep quiet, then lose out.

So, who can help the estate workers? Don’t tell this problem also need PM Najib to interfere. Others do what then?

Which is which 1Malaysia?

/* August 3rd, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions 5 comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Interesting words from ex-PM.  This time, its about 1Malaysia (a.k.a. 1 Malay-sia; 1Malaysia, 2System; and few other varieties.).

Malaysian Insider wrote this:

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed has criticised the Najib administration’s 1 Malaysia slogan, claiming that the concept needed further “explanation” to prevent it from being interpreted differently by various races.

Dr Mahathir lamented the fact that the 1 Malaysia slogan, introduced by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak shortly after he took office on August 3 last year, had failed to unite Malaysians as a whole.

I have spoken to the Chinese, the Malays, each person has different opinions and cannot be united. I feel that an explanation is needed,” Bernama quoted Dr Mahathir (pic) as saying here today.

Dr Mahathir said that the onus was on the Najib administration to ensure that Malaysians understood the idea behind the 1 Malaysia slogan, to avoid further misunderstanding or confusion.

They (the rakyat) do not know which is which, which ones are for the Chinese and which ones are for the Malays. If I were to explain, how should I know, I was not the one who created the slogan,” said the country’s longest-serving Prime Minister.

Dr Mahathir’s remarks today come after a recent public opinion poll by the Merdeka Center found that a majority of non-Bumiputeras in the country considered Najib’s 1 Malaysia slogan a mere political gimmick.

According to the poll, only 39 per cent of non-Bumiputeras accepted the 1 Malaysia concept despite the fact that it had been introduced for over a year.

Forty-six per cent out of 3,141 respondents interviewed felt that 1Malaysia was only a “tactic to win over non-Malay support”, while another 16 per cent had either refused to answer the poll questions or claimed to have no understanding of the concept whatsoever.

Respondents were undecided on whether Malaysia had become more united under the Najib administration, with 48 per cent saying yes and 43 per cent claiming that the country was still disunited.

Its quite clear actually. The slogan is based on constitution, so its not 1Malaysia in the literal sense (equality) or what one would expect it to be.  Its based on Article 153 (reproduced below from Wikipedia):

  1. It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.
  2. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, but subject to the provisions of Article 40 and of this Article, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall exercise his functions under this Constitution and federal law in such manner as may be necessary to safeguard the special provision of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and to ensure the reservation for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak of such proportion as he may deem reasonable of positions in the public service (other than the public service of a State) and of scholarships, exhibitions and other similar educational or training privileges or special facilities given or accorded by the Federal Government and, when any permit or licence for the operation of any trade or business is required by federal law, then, subject to the provisions of that law and this Article, of such permits and licences.
  3. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may, in order to ensure in accordance with Clause (2) the reservation to Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak of positions in the public service and of scholarships, exhibitions and other educational or training privileges or special facilities, give such general directions as may be required for that purpose to any Commission to which Part X applies or to any authority charged with responsibility for the grant of such scholarships, exhibitions or other educational or training privileges or special facilities; and the Commission or authority shall duly comply with the directions.
  4. In exercising his functions under this Constitution and federal law in accordance with Clauses (1) to (3) the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall not deprive any person of any public office held by him or of the continuance of any scholarship, exhibition or other educational or training privileges or special facilities enjoyed by him.
  5. This Article does not derogate from the provisions of Article 136.
  6. Where by existing federal law a permit or licence is required for the operation of any trade or business the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may exercise his functions under that law in such manner, or give such general directions to any authority charged under that law with the grant of such permits or licences, as may be required to ensure the reservation of such proportion of such permits or licences for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may deem reasonable, and the authority shall duly comply with the directions.
  7. Nothing in this Article shall operate to deprive or authorise the deprivation of any person of any right, privilege, permit or licence accrued to or enjoyed or held by him or to authorised a refusal to renew to any person any such permit or licence or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of a person any permit or licence when the renewal or grant might reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events.
  8. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, where by any federal law any permit or licence is required for the operation of any trade or business, that law may provide for the reservation of a proportion of such permits or licences for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak; but no such law shall for the purpose of ensuring such a reservation-
    • (a) deprive or authorise the deprivation of any person of any right, privilege, permit or licence accrued to or enjoyed or held by him;
    • (b) authorise a refusal to renew to any person any such permit or licence or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of any person any permit or licence when the renewal or grant might in accordance with he other provisions of the law reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events, or prevent any person from transferring together with his business any transferable licence to operate that business; or
    • (c) where no permit or licence was previously required for the operation of the trade or business, authorise a refusal to grant a permit or licence to any person for the operation of any trade or business which immediately before the coming into force of the law he had been bona fide carrying on, or authorise a refusal subsequently to renew to any such person any permit or licence, or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of any such person any such permit or licence when the renewal or grant might in accordance with the other provisions of that law reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events.
    1. (8A) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, where in any University, College and other educational institution providing education after Malaysian Certificate of Education or its equivalent, the number of places offered by the authority responsible for the management of the University, College or such educational institution to candidates for any course of study is less than the number of candidates qualified for such places, it shall be lawful for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong by virtue of this Article to give such directions to the authority as may be required to ensure the reservation of such proportion of such places for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may deem reasonable, and the authority shall duly comply with the directions.
  9. Nothing in this Article shall empower Parliament to restrict business or trade solely for the purpose of reservations for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak.
    1. (9A) In this Article the expression “natives” in relation to the State of Sabah or Sarawak shall have the meaning assigned to it in Article 161A.
  10. The Constitution of the State of any Ruler may make provision corresponding (with the necessary modifications) to the provisions of this Article.

That why we have this confusion. That’s why we have different people singing different tunes. That’s why we have ex-PM saying things like “They (the rakyat) do not know which is which, which ones are for the Chinese and which ones are for the Malays”. For the uninitiated or those plan to “misuse” the term, they consider that everybody is same in this country. However, those who really understand the meaning behind it, will realise that 1Malaysia is a different concept. So, which is you?